Crane, ] 70 {March 16, 
The second work of the class of treatises which we shall notice is the 
Summa Virtutum ac Vitiorum of Gulielmus Peraldus, also a Dominican 
and bishop of Lyons.* He died in 1275, leaving besides the above work a 
large number of sermons. The Summa, which is quoted by both Herolt 
and Htienne de Bourbon, is, as its name indicates, a treatise on the princi- 
pal virtues and vices, forty of the former and forty-one of the latter being 
considered in detail. For convenience of reference the work is supplied 
with very full indices and analytical tables of contents. The evempla no 
longer have the importance attributed to them in the works we have 
already cited, and when they are used for purposes of illustration, they are 
given in a dry, brief way. For example, under the head of Jnvidia (Vol 
ii, p. 281), Peraldus cites a well-known story as follows: ‘‘Exemplum de 
quodam rege, qui concessit cuidam avaro et cuidam invido munus quod 
eligerent, ita tamen quod munus ejus qui posterior peteret, duplicaretur 
et cum uterque differet, preecepit rex invido ut prius peteret: qui petit ut 
eruetur sibi unus oculus, volens quod proximo eruerentur ambo.’’ + 
Although Peraldus’s work possesses but little of the interest of the work 
last discussed, it is still valuable. The writer was a learned man, and 
cites not merely the Christian authors popular during the middle ages, but 
quotes constantly from the classics, From his pages may also be gleaned 
many details of medieval society. |: 
The most extensive and in many respects the most valuable of all the 
works of the class we are now examining is the Swrwma Pracdicantium ot 
John Bromyard, an English Dominican. He was from Herford, and 
became a celebrated theologian and jurist at Oxford. He was afterwards 
professor of theology at Cambridge, and is said to have been one of 
Wicliff ’s opponents in the Council of London, 1382. He died in 1418, 
«The first edition is Cologne, 1479. Ithas been frequently reprinted since: our 
copy is Cologne, 1629, two volumes, 4to. 
+ As this story, which is of Oriental origin (see Benfey, Pantschatantra, i, 
304), is found in three of the collections we are examining, we have an oppor- 
tunity to compare its treatment by the various compilers. Herolt, Prompt, Hx. 
I, 33, is almost as concise; Bromyard, I, 6, 19, is a Mttle more diffuse; Holkot, 
Super Sapientiam, lect, XX IX, gives the story as follows: “ Narratur de quodam 
cupido et invido insimul iter agentibus quod vox de celo venit ad eos dicens ; 
Petat unus quidquid voluerit et habuerit, sic tamen quod socius ejus habebit 
duplum, Fit contraversia quis eorum prius peteret, Tandem invidus: Peto, in- 
quit, ut eruatur mihi alter oculus.” This story was always a very popular one, as 
may be seen by a glance at the long list of parallels cited by Oesterley to Pauli, 
647. Another story in Peraldus ii, 307, “true son refusing to shoot arrow at 
father’s dead body,” may likewise be compared with Etienne de Bourbon, No, 
160 (mentioned above), Bromyard, IF. 5,17, Prompt. Zx,, B.9,and Libro de Hnxem- 
plos, 103 (see also Glesta Rom, ed, Oesterly, cap. 45). 
198, 
{ Peraldus, too, reproves trains and long shoes, ii, 211, 212, 215, 
2This work, although popular, has not passed vhrough as many editions as 
some of the above mentioned work. The following are all the editions we can 
discover: editio prince, s. 1. e. a. fol,; Norinberg., 1485, 4to, (Fabricius, fol.) ; ibid, 
1518, 4to,; Parisiis, 1518, 4to.; Lugd., 15, 22, 4to; Venet, 1586, fol. (Fabr.4to); Antverp, 
1614, fol. Our copy is the last named, 
wo 
